I haven’t read Attridge, but I’m more or less with him, and I would say I have a very good ear. Though *did* he say that any line with 5 beats is a line of iambic pentameter? *That’s* not right, because it ignores that “iambic” refers to a beat pattern (or, to be really specific, a set range of patterning). And “Similarly, a beat may be advanced, if the resulting double-beat is followed by a double off-beat” - I don’t understand this statement: when a beat lands early, swapping stress placement with the *previous* syllable, you have a swinging “DUM-di-di-DUM” pattern. So I don’t know what “double beat” you’re referring to there.
“Penta” in “pentameter” means five. I fully consider that to mean five beats. If your opinion is that a pentameter can have a varying number of beats, what is it you think *are* numbered five of in a pentameter? “THERE’S a GREAT SPIrit GONE. THUS did I deSIRE it.” “Spirit” is actually metrically contracted to one syllable here (as it often was in Shakespeare’s day). The pitch then falls on “gone”, which is an offbeat.
“With SUCH FULL LICense AS both TRUTH and MALice”. I absolutely do not hear six beats here. And by the same principle that the middle of three light syllables may undergo promotion to a beat, the middle of three heavy syllables may undergo demotion to an offbeat (I call this “di-DUM-DUM-DUM” pattern a “march”).
A light beat may rhythmically carry secondary status. A secondary beat is still a beat.
A number of the lines you quote contain the pattern I call a “catch”: DUM-di-DUM-DUM. This is the only pattern that combines a displaced beat with a stressed offbeat. I absolutely hear these patterns within a passage of iambic verse as two beats; if you don’t, fair enough (though it could be interesting to see how you hear it within a tetrameter poem). But you then need to answer the question, “What *is* ‘penta’ referring to?”
Well, one challenge for Attridge's view is, what to do about disagreements about where the beats in a line are? If I say six, and you say five, how do we settle who is right? He makes a lot of assertions where the beats fall in example lines (as you do, and I), but as far as I can tell in the end we're each thrown back on what we ourselves "perceive," and that, I think, is a weakness in the theory. Note that theories that generative linguists produce don't have this problem; they're theories only use the concepts of stress and syllable count, about which there is less disagreement.
You asked what there are "five" of, in iambic pentameter, on my view. Well I don't have a theory--that's why I'm writing about other people's theories, and explaining where I think they are weak. If I had my own I'd set up shop and put it up for sale. But if you want an alternative, there's the view that there are "five strong positions" in an abstract template. A line is in iambic pentameter if it matches that template closely enough; but that can happen even if it doesn't have five stressed syllables (or five "beats" if you like).
It's positions in an "abstract template" that are strong or weak. The template is distinct from any actual, concrete line of verse. It's just the sequence "WSWSWSWSWS." So "strong" and "weak" aren't properties of the thing you hear--the line of verse, "But soft" etc.
A line of verse, then, is in iambic pentameter if it "fits" the template; the criteria for fit are, in these theories, quite complicated and use technical terminology from linguistics (that i don't pretend to understand). Typically, though, you check for fit by (i) taking the first syllable of the line to occupy the first position in the template (a W position), the second syllable to occupy the second position (an S position), and so on (though this over-simplifies); and then, for example, (ii) checking that no syllable bearing "lexical stress" (roughly, the most stressed syllable in a polysyllabic word) occupies a W position. There are other rules too, but (ii) is one of the most commonly-proposed. This rule can be satisfied even if one of the "S" positions is occupied by an unstressed syllable. The theory does not postulate any such phenomenon as "hearing a syllable as realizing a beat."
In Marvell’s The Garden, there’s a well known line: “To a green thought in a green shade”. There are two ways that could be scanned: either as two pumps or as two catches. The latter:
TO a GREEN THOUGHT | IN a GREEN SHADE
Delivered that way, do you hear it as six beats? In the context of the stanza, do you hear it as six beats?
I mean, in the end I don't think I hear beats in poetry. When I say that some lines of pentameter have four, or six, beats, I'm trying to play along with Attridge's way of thinking. But when I stop playing along, I think he's "hearing" something that isn't there. So I can't answer your question about Marvell. (I can tell you which syllables I think are stressed, and which are unstressed; or anyway the relative stresses between them. But Attridge is clear that "beats", whatever they are, are not the same as "stresses.")
Thanks for writing this. There's a book called Poem : Lyric, sign, meter by Don Paterson. It goes into further depth about meter and beats and so on. Would love to know your thoughts about it if you've happened to have read the book.
I haven’t read Attridge, but I’m more or less with him, and I would say I have a very good ear. Though *did* he say that any line with 5 beats is a line of iambic pentameter? *That’s* not right, because it ignores that “iambic” refers to a beat pattern (or, to be really specific, a set range of patterning). And “Similarly, a beat may be advanced, if the resulting double-beat is followed by a double off-beat” - I don’t understand this statement: when a beat lands early, swapping stress placement with the *previous* syllable, you have a swinging “DUM-di-di-DUM” pattern. So I don’t know what “double beat” you’re referring to there.
“Penta” in “pentameter” means five. I fully consider that to mean five beats. If your opinion is that a pentameter can have a varying number of beats, what is it you think *are* numbered five of in a pentameter? “THERE’S a GREAT SPIrit GONE. THUS did I deSIRE it.” “Spirit” is actually metrically contracted to one syllable here (as it often was in Shakespeare’s day). The pitch then falls on “gone”, which is an offbeat.
“With SUCH FULL LICense AS both TRUTH and MALice”. I absolutely do not hear six beats here. And by the same principle that the middle of three light syllables may undergo promotion to a beat, the middle of three heavy syllables may undergo demotion to an offbeat (I call this “di-DUM-DUM-DUM” pattern a “march”).
A light beat may rhythmically carry secondary status. A secondary beat is still a beat.
A number of the lines you quote contain the pattern I call a “catch”: DUM-di-DUM-DUM. This is the only pattern that combines a displaced beat with a stressed offbeat. I absolutely hear these patterns within a passage of iambic verse as two beats; if you don’t, fair enough (though it could be interesting to see how you hear it within a tetrameter poem). But you then need to answer the question, “What *is* ‘penta’ referring to?”
The catch and the pump (di-di-DUM-DUM) both generally require the support of a grammatical structure to ensure the beats are clearly recognisable, as I describe in this post (though they can instead be rendered clearly through how its delivered, if that reflects the author’s intention; modern poets, especially from Browning onwards, experimented with this): https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-use-2-syllable-words-in-iambic-pentameter/answer/Keir-Fabian?ch=17&oid=305732233&share=1ce26406&srid=LqSx&target_type=answer
Well, one challenge for Attridge's view is, what to do about disagreements about where the beats in a line are? If I say six, and you say five, how do we settle who is right? He makes a lot of assertions where the beats fall in example lines (as you do, and I), but as far as I can tell in the end we're each thrown back on what we ourselves "perceive," and that, I think, is a weakness in the theory. Note that theories that generative linguists produce don't have this problem; they're theories only use the concepts of stress and syllable count, about which there is less disagreement.
You asked what there are "five" of, in iambic pentameter, on my view. Well I don't have a theory--that's why I'm writing about other people's theories, and explaining where I think they are weak. If I had my own I'd set up shop and put it up for sale. But if you want an alternative, there's the view that there are "five strong positions" in an abstract template. A line is in iambic pentameter if it matches that template closely enough; but that can happen even if it doesn't have five stressed syllables (or five "beats" if you like).
What defines a “strong position”? To me, that’s absolutely synonymous with a beat position! What makes a position “strong” to your ear?
It's positions in an "abstract template" that are strong or weak. The template is distinct from any actual, concrete line of verse. It's just the sequence "WSWSWSWSWS." So "strong" and "weak" aren't properties of the thing you hear--the line of verse, "But soft" etc.
A line of verse, then, is in iambic pentameter if it "fits" the template; the criteria for fit are, in these theories, quite complicated and use technical terminology from linguistics (that i don't pretend to understand). Typically, though, you check for fit by (i) taking the first syllable of the line to occupy the first position in the template (a W position), the second syllable to occupy the second position (an S position), and so on (though this over-simplifies); and then, for example, (ii) checking that no syllable bearing "lexical stress" (roughly, the most stressed syllable in a polysyllabic word) occupies a W position. There are other rules too, but (ii) is one of the most commonly-proposed. This rule can be satisfied even if one of the "S" positions is occupied by an unstressed syllable. The theory does not postulate any such phenomenon as "hearing a syllable as realizing a beat."
In Marvell’s The Garden, there’s a well known line: “To a green thought in a green shade”. There are two ways that could be scanned: either as two pumps or as two catches. The latter:
TO a GREEN THOUGHT | IN a GREEN SHADE
Delivered that way, do you hear it as six beats? In the context of the stanza, do you hear it as six beats?
Do you hear…
Fair Quiet, have I found thee here,
…as five beats?
Do you hear…
In busy companies of men;
…as three beats?
I mean, in the end I don't think I hear beats in poetry. When I say that some lines of pentameter have four, or six, beats, I'm trying to play along with Attridge's way of thinking. But when I stop playing along, I think he's "hearing" something that isn't there. So I can't answer your question about Marvell. (I can tell you which syllables I think are stressed, and which are unstressed; or anyway the relative stresses between them. But Attridge is clear that "beats", whatever they are, are not the same as "stresses.")
Hm. So you don’t hear a rhythm in metered verse? Because if you *do* hear a rhythm, I don’t see how you can’t hear beats.
Why isn't hearing patterned stresses or accents enough to hear a rhythm?
Thanks for writing this. There's a book called Poem : Lyric, sign, meter by Don Paterson. It goes into further depth about meter and beats and so on. Would love to know your thoughts about it if you've happened to have read the book.
Looks interesting, I'll check it out.